目的：比较“1+PRN”和“3+PRN”方案行玻璃体腔内注射康柏西普治疗视网膜分支静脉阻塞(BRVO)合并黄斑水肿(ME)的临床疗效。

方法：回顾性分析20例接受“1+PRN”方案及15例接受“3+PRN”方案行玻璃体腔内注射康柏西普治疗BRVO合并ME患者为期1a的临床资料。比较治疗前后两组患者的黄斑中心凹视网膜厚度(CMT)以及国际标准视力表检测最佳矫正视力(BCVA)，其中BCVA转换为最小分辨角对数(LogMAR)视力记录。

结果：经治疗12mo后，“1+PRN”组的BCVA由0.58±0.21提高到0.34±0.18，CMT由561±65μm降低到252±69μm； 在“3+PRN”组中，BRVO患者的BCVA由0.64±0.21提高到0.29±0.13，CMT由585±87μm降低到242±56μm。组间比较，差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。“1+PRN”组的平均总计注射次数为2.3±1.2次，低于“3+PRN”组的4.1±1.1次，差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论：在BRVO合并ME行玻璃体腔注射康柏西普的治疗中，“1+PRN”和“3+PRN”方案都是安全、有效的。

METHODS: The clinical data of 35 cases were retrospectively analyzed; 20 received one initial IVR injection(1+PRN group)and 15 cases received 3-monthly IVRs(3+PRN). Both groups were followed monthly for 12mo. The best-corrected visual acuity(BCVA)and the macular central retinal thickness(CMT)on optical coherence tomography were evaluated before and after treatment, and the BCVA results were converted to the LogMAR visual acuity.

RESULTS: The mean LogMAR BCVA and CMT, respectively, improved from 0.58±0.21 to 0.34±0.18 and from 561±65μm to 252±69μm in the “1+PRN” group(P<0.05)and from 0.64±0.21 to 0.29±0.13 and from 585±87μm to 242±56μm in the “3+PRN” group(P>0.05). During the study period, the mean total number of injections was significantly smaller in the “1+PRN” group than in the “3+PRN” group(2.3±1.2 and 4.1±1.1, respectively, P<0.05). No serious complications related to the IVB injections developed in either group.

CONCLUSION: The two methods are both safe and effective for the treatment of BRVO combined with ME.